Open main menu
Information icon.svg This user is, of their own volition, no longer very active on Wikimedia Commons.
This is not indicative of breaking any Wikimedia policies.

Hi I noticed you reverted my edits to Nur-Sultan imagesEdit

Hi I noticed you reverted my edits to Nur-Sultan articles. On the Wikipedia article about the city on English Wikipedia the page has been moved and all categories associated with the city have been moved to the new name. Other Wikiprojects are following suit. I am merely updating manually the categories on wiki-commons. If you dispute my actions, please give reasons. Best.Resnjari (talk) 16:00, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Dear Resnjari,
I already provided a reason for my actions but I'll happily clarify my reasoning further. The reason why your rename requests are rejected is that your requests don't meet one of the criteria mentioned at Commons:File renaming. The reason you provided doesn't apply. The photographs aren't part of a set as defined in the file renaming guideline. When a city changes its name that's not a reason to rename hundreds of files. Regards. Natuur12 (talk) 16:06, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Still that does not preclude changing the name of pictures either. I could place my own reason, i.e name change but that would take more work. I am changing the image name because most are generic and of landmarks etc. Not all people know of Kazakhstan, yet alone the names of the cities. My changes are done so editors are able to identify the images.Resnjari (talk) 16:11, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
@Resnjari: Could you please elaborate which reason mentioned in the rename policy applies? Natuur12 (talk) 16:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Maybe i picked the wrong option first with 4 -i thought the "harmonize the names of a set of images" was the way to go. However @Option 3 would be the one regarding obvious errors. The city is no longer known as Astana. In the additional option Additional explanation / reason / justification is where i would have to write update name or something like when making the request, but that would take to much time for each image. The Nur-Sultan name has been applied to all its categories already in Wiki commons. There is nothing uncontroversial in updating file names of cities where contemporary landmarks are located. Obviously i am not touching things in the city that still have Astana in its name like sports teams and some landmarks like the opera house etc as the changes to those are not applicable.Resnjari (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
@Resnjari: the guideline pretty much explains what is meant with "obvious error". It's either misidentified (not outdated), a wrong noun, a wrong date or a spelling error. Based on this there is little reason to assume that outdated is also covered by criteria 4. We don't rename all pictures which refer to Macedonia to North Macedonia either. Natuur12 (talk) 16:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
But wait hold on, some of my file renamings regarding Nur-Sultan were passed by an admin, only correcting my option to number 3 [1] while still keeping option 4. So that would mean that there is nothing precluding the renaming of image names to update them? Regarding Macedonia, its has its own unique can of worms and has always been such on Wikipedia. I know. I was involved in the recent MOSMAC process on redrafting guidelines. No other part of Wikipedia has such topic specific guidelines. Those circumstances are not applicable here. The Kazakh capital city's name was not disputed internationally, there have not been edit wars over its name on Wiki etc. I am merely updating image names.Resnjari (talk) 17:03, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
@Resnjari: A discussion only has merit if someone makes an effort to avoid the excessive use of fallacy's. You are wrongly using an argumentum ab auctoritate, using several non sequitur, avoiding my main point and are creating an alphabet soup. MOSMAC is some niche en-wiki jargon. And obviously your conclusions don't add up. Regarding Macedonia: my point is that a rename doesn't equal file rename.
Some renames are accepted but that doesn't mean that the renames are valid. You still haven't provided a valid reasoning based on our guideline for your renames. If a guideline isn't suitable for a situation you require consensus. Natuur12 (talk) 17:24, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Hold on, using Macedonia is a strawman. I say this not in disrespect but because one admin accepted my reasons for a name change via option 4 and added option 3. This is what the admin wrote: [2] "Criterion 4 (harmonizing names of file set) + Criterion 3 See w:Nur-Sultan naming "previously Astana".)" This is exactly my rationale too as per my comments for updating the file names. I have not stated otherwise nor is it my intent to do so. I should also note i as an editor are not given the option of picking two options when nominating a image file for renaming, while the admin who did it appears can do so with the tools available to them. So most editors are also limited in that respect in picking one option or the other. As both you and a fellow admin colleague were on at the same time, now there is a bit of a conundrum because there are image sets [3] where half the file names have been renamed because one admin got to them and accepted them first, while a whole host of others on the same file set did not go though because you rejected them and some wher rejected by that editor. What is the consistency here? If you say its about the wrong reasoning or option, i can renominate all the file names using the option the other admin gave for the images.Resnjari (talk) 17:44, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Anyway i doubt images will get updated. Never mind.Resnjari (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) @Resnjari: Again, you haven't demonstrated that your requested renames are supported by our guidelines. Unfortunately it often happens that files are unjustifiably renamed. And when that happens there can be inconsistency. But that doesn't necessarily mean that there is a problem. There is no reason why the old and new variant can't be both used at the same time. Common isn't a place where we harmonize for the sake of harmonizing after all. (Btw, an analogy and a strawman are different). I already explained the proper steps to take. Natuur12 (talk) 17:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
I know what an analogy and a strawman are and their differences. The Macedonia thing has been used ad nausuem to make strawman arguments before on Wikipedia. The Macedonia case has been treated differently over there because of its contested and screwed up nature due to nationalism and other Balkan insanity. That's why the name wars via wiki editing required specific enforced guidelines by the wider project which other topic areas have not had. I am not going to go into it here as that was not the purpose for what this thread was about in the first place and i am not going to treat your talkpage as a forum. I guess wikicommons works differently from the main Wikipedia project. Its a shame because i was willing to update the file images and its Wikicommon's loss, not mine. Its editors who will have a poorer experience as not all are familiar with obscure topic areas like Kazakhstan and finding images wont be so easy when official and uncontested changes like this happen.Resnjari (talk) 18:06, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Natuur12".